Path 2

The Week We Talked About Sarah Palin’s Tits

June 14, 2010

Heidi Montag has appeared on the reality show The Hills and performed some dance music. She is best known, though, for her various plastic surgeries, including spectacular breast implants, which she has craftily used to retain media attention.

Montag’s lifts and load-ins have been covered in national magazines and on TV. Last month she discussed the topic on the Tonight Show; last week Joan Rivers offered her insider perspective on it. It’s fair to say that Montag’s surgeries are all that’s keeping the marginally talented performer in the limelight.

Which brings us to Sarah Palin.

We can’t be sure where the rumor that Palin had received breast implants came from. It was first seen at Wonkette, which did a simple “before and after” photo comparison and made the call.

Wonkette, as anyone who’s spent five minutes reading it knows, is a comedy site known for having a bit of fun with politics. But rightbloggers are not about fun (at least, not intentionally). They rose to defend the former governor’s breasts from charges of augmentation in deadly earnest.

Some took the approach that the best defense is a good offensiveness.

Another Black Conservative suggested that liberals were obsessed with Palin’s tits because their own women were fug. “Perhaps in this case it is because the left is not use to female political figures actually having a figure,” he wrote. “It is like some unwritten rule for lefty female politicians that they must appear as drab as possible.” He illustrated with unflattering photos of Democratic female politicians.

While these leftist women favor “Boyish hair,” “No make up,” “Drab clothing,” and a “Perpetual sour puss,” observed ABC, Palin “just doesn’t believe she has to suppress her femininity to be effective.” In other words, the Democrat women are like Olivia Newton-John at the beginning of Grease, and Palin is like Olivia Newton-John at the end of it. We’re surprised Another Black Conservative let the secret out — don’t they know Hollywood is in the socialists’ pocket, and will send a squad of hair and make-up artists to redress the balance?

“Sometimes,” said Doug Powers, “I think that the left simply forgets that they’re not looking at Tina Fey.” ‘Cuz she’s a dog too, get it? If the “leftwing blogosphere is buzzing” about Palin’s “bosom enhancement,” suggested Nancy Reyes, “presumably they are all thin and undersized above, and are clueless about full figured gals.”

Some rightbloggers, in a more chivalrous mood, declared that Palin’s breasts not only were authentic, but gave great pleasure in contemplation thereof.

Former Penthouse editor Gerard Van der Leun claimed he was “currently agnostic on the issue of [google spider on] Sarah Palin, breasts, boobs, tatas, bazooms, balongas, hooters, honkers, tater tots,… [google spider off]” because “I have long since learned not to yearn for those things I cannot see, feel, touch, taste and measure. I am, however, amused by the frothing search on the Left for whether or not Sarah Palin’s pair has grown.” They’re frothing?

TigerHawk took an interesting approach, defending implants in general against the presumed criticism of liberals, who being hippies probably prefer real breasts like a bunch of jerks.

“First, does the left enhance — and I use the word advisedly — its appeal among the electorate by suggesting that we ought to ridicule women for getting breast implants?” he asked. “The boobery need no further reminder that the left disdains their sense of aesthetic…”

Apparently we’re not the only ones who’ve heard of Heidi Montag. (TigerHawk helpfully added a link explaining the word “boobery” was Mencken’s term for the imbecile American electorate. When you’re talking tits, it’s actually no drawback to remind the audience that you think they’re dumb.)

This salivary option was not available to the female rightbloggers, so a bunch of them yelled about feminism instead.

Sister Toldjah linked the breast rumors to several other media crimes of which Palin is allegedly a victim — including the famous fake Palin-bikini-rifle picture, which we always thought was an apolitical prank — and then complained that “far leftists” had mounted these assaults because Palin “doesn’t toe the ‘females are victims’ line.”

Sister Toldjah also attacked feminists because they had not rushed to the defense of the millionaire TV commentator (“Where’s the widespread ‘feminist’ outrage? I won’t hold my breath”). Feminism, said Cassy Fiano, had been “hijacked by rabid fascist feminists” who, instead of pursuing the legitimate aims of feminism (e.g., defending Sarah Palin), sought “unlimited taxpayer-funded abortions available right up until the moment of birth, universal health care,” and other such horrors. (Like Sister Toldjah, Fiano also accused feminists of trying to “instill a victim mentality in women.” Irony isn’t their strong suit.)

Greta Van Susteren further detailed feminism’s sins against Palin: When “Newsweek put a picture of Palin — a former WOMAN Governor of the biggest state — on the cover in short shorts,” the cowardly “feminists hid under a rock.” Also, David Letterman, etc. “Why are the feminists silent?” demanded Van Susteren. “Or are they really not feminists?” (We have to admit that one took us by surprise — repeatedly attacking feminists, then suggesting that they’re not really feminists at all! We bet it’s even trippier when you’re stoned.)

They were all outdone by Legal Insurrection, which declared that with their “liberal misogyny directed at Sarah Palin,” liberal feminists had “Killed and Field Dressed Liberal Feminism,” yet somehow reached beyond the grave to spread rumors about Palin’s breasts.

The boob issue somewhat coincided with GOP political primaries, for some of which Palin had offered endorsements.

Some of these had at first confused observers. Palin continued to plump for the Tea Party movement — recently she appeared in a Fox News “Tea Party Forum” with Ron Paul, saying it was “in the nation’s best interests for the Tea Party movement to stay together, to be banded together, united, and the changes that we need to see take place in this country very quickly,” which we take as an endorsement. But when it came time to endorse, she snubbed some Tea Party candidates, like Chuck DeVore, in favor of establishment candidates like former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina.

This Photoshop degrades women.

The reason for this apostasy became evident when the primaries were done and Palin was shown to have picked a number of winning female candidates (including Fiorina). This gave rise to claims of a “Year of the Conservative Woman” from many quarters (including that of famous feminist Ralph Reed) — which reflects positively on their godmother Palin.

(If you expect old-fashioned conservatives to gag at this kind of identity-politics pandering, please be advised that such conservatives no longer exist.)

In any case, it’s a nice news hook for the continuing ambitions of Palin. And she didn’t even have to run for (or quit) elective office to reap the publicity whirlwind.

But wasn’t the implant story an unwelcome distraction from it? No, because for the Palin machine, there are no distractions — anything that happens, however negative it may seem to normal people, can be repurposed in support of her cause. This is, after all, the woman who claimed quitting political office was about “what is best for Alaska.”

Because nothing embarrasses her, everything is grist for her mill. The implant story therefore worked for her — because it gave her champions a chance to both celebrate her vicarious primary victories, and claim the victim status that is the life’s blood of the Palin permanent campaign. So when we talked about Sarah Palin’s tits, whether in jest, with admiration, or in righteous anger, it was good for her — because we were still talking, despite everything, about Sarah Palin.